Total Pageviews
Saturday, January 31, 2015
Friday, January 30, 2015
Dad's Birthday, 2015
Labels:
1970s,
Fashion,
Interior Decorating,
Manitoba,
Robert G. Woods
Thursday, January 29, 2015
Bucket List
1. Yellow, plastic, two litres
2. Green, plastic, ten litres
3. Wooden, five litres
4. Pink, child's beach toy size, with accompanying mini-shovel
5. Steel, used in Three Stooges pratfall
6. Odo's, used for regeneration
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
Revisiting Buck Rogers
Over the last couple of weeks I've been making my way through the Buck Rogers in the 25th Century DVD set that I picked up 11 years ago. 11 YEARS AGO? And I thought my book backlog was bad.
In any event, revisiting a show that I first watched as a 10-to-12-year old has been entertaining. Even as a kid I knew the show was, on some level, derivative, unpolished and badly written, but I still enjoyed it because, hey...spaceships, aliens, scantily-clad space princesses, Erin Gray as Wilma Deering. Whatever the show's faults, the producer knew their audience: young boys (and hopefully a few girls inspired by Erin Gray's steely performance of the first season).
Like Battlestar Galactica, Buck Rogers presents a potentially interesting central conceit marred by lacklustre writing. The setup is simple but poignant: frozen in time for 500 years, astronaut Buck Rogers wakes up in the late 25th century to an Earth still recovering from a nuclear holocaust (one that happened, as it turned out, just after Buck left earth).
The pilot and a handful of episodes touch on Buck's sense of loss; unique in the world, this is a man who has truly lost everything in a way no one else ever could: not just a loved one, but all his loved ones; not just a country and a culture, but an entire civilization and all its complexity. (In a second season episode we discover that the Pyramids, Chichen Itza and Mount Rushmore are the only human artifacts to have survived to the 25th century.) Aside from a handful of scenes, though, the dramatic potential of Buck's displacement is virtually ignored in favour of pretty standard space villainy.
Were I to reinvent the series, I'd spend a lot more time exploring what a post-nuclear holocaust world would look like after 500 years of healing, and how Buck adapts. I'd probably ignore outer space entirely, relying instead on experts to come up with the sorts of real-world challenges such a society might face. I imagine everything would change, from manufacturing to agriculture to relationship customs to art. The art would be fascinating, one would think. You could even borrow an idea from the second season of Buck Rogers, in which the format changes to a more Star Trek-like exploration show; just keep the setting on Earth and have Buck and Wilma take on an HMS Beagle-style scouting expedition, roaming the world to catalogue mutant life and castoff pockets of survivors, not to mention any remaining valuable resources.
(As a kid I stopped watching Buck Rogers early in the second season, right after the Mark-Lenard-removes-his-head episode. Aside from the sarcastic new robot Chricton, season two really doesn't have much to recommend it.)
With Twin Peaks and The X-Files coming back to TV, it's not too far-fetched to imagine Buck Rogers might come back. It might even be good this time around.
In any event, revisiting a show that I first watched as a 10-to-12-year old has been entertaining. Even as a kid I knew the show was, on some level, derivative, unpolished and badly written, but I still enjoyed it because, hey...spaceships, aliens, scantily-clad space princesses, Erin Gray as Wilma Deering. Whatever the show's faults, the producer knew their audience: young boys (and hopefully a few girls inspired by Erin Gray's steely performance of the first season).
Like Battlestar Galactica, Buck Rogers presents a potentially interesting central conceit marred by lacklustre writing. The setup is simple but poignant: frozen in time for 500 years, astronaut Buck Rogers wakes up in the late 25th century to an Earth still recovering from a nuclear holocaust (one that happened, as it turned out, just after Buck left earth).
The pilot and a handful of episodes touch on Buck's sense of loss; unique in the world, this is a man who has truly lost everything in a way no one else ever could: not just a loved one, but all his loved ones; not just a country and a culture, but an entire civilization and all its complexity. (In a second season episode we discover that the Pyramids, Chichen Itza and Mount Rushmore are the only human artifacts to have survived to the 25th century.) Aside from a handful of scenes, though, the dramatic potential of Buck's displacement is virtually ignored in favour of pretty standard space villainy.
Were I to reinvent the series, I'd spend a lot more time exploring what a post-nuclear holocaust world would look like after 500 years of healing, and how Buck adapts. I'd probably ignore outer space entirely, relying instead on experts to come up with the sorts of real-world challenges such a society might face. I imagine everything would change, from manufacturing to agriculture to relationship customs to art. The art would be fascinating, one would think. You could even borrow an idea from the second season of Buck Rogers, in which the format changes to a more Star Trek-like exploration show; just keep the setting on Earth and have Buck and Wilma take on an HMS Beagle-style scouting expedition, roaming the world to catalogue mutant life and castoff pockets of survivors, not to mention any remaining valuable resources.
(As a kid I stopped watching Buck Rogers early in the second season, right after the Mark-Lenard-removes-his-head episode. Aside from the sarcastic new robot Chricton, season two really doesn't have much to recommend it.)
With Twin Peaks and The X-Files coming back to TV, it's not too far-fetched to imagine Buck Rogers might come back. It might even be good this time around.
Labels:
Buck Rogers,
DVD,
popular culture,
science fiction,
television
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
Doubleplusungood Art
Monday, January 26, 2015
Bye, Raj
It's easy to forget it now, but once upon a time Dr. Raj Sherman was perhaps the best-known politician in Alberta, back when he was a rabble-rousing backbencher in Premier Ed Stelmach's Progressive Conservative caucus. Raj defended public health care with great passion and sincerity, and he paid a heavy political price for it.
Raj was the third and last of the three doctors I worked for who led the Alberta Liberal Caucus, once Alberta's Official Opposition, now, it has to be said, a small rump third party. (The first two were Drs. Taft and Swann.) I didn't work with Raj as long as I had with either Kevin or David, but I got to know him well enough to say that his heart was in the right place and he really cared about Albertans, particularly the vulnerable. In a province that vilifies Liberals, Raj took on the challenge of the hardest, most thankless job in Canadian politics, and for that alone I think he deserves thanks.
I shot the photo above on February 1, 2012, a few months before leaving politics behind. It was a pretty nice day for February in Alberta, and Raj was patient and pleasant as I fought with the light; I'm an amateur photographer, not a professional, and I appreciated his forbearance.
Today Raj resigned as Leader of the Alberta Liberals. Whatever he does next, I hope Dr. Sherman finds happiness and fulfillment. He tried to build a better Alberta, and I think that's pretty noble.
Raj was the third and last of the three doctors I worked for who led the Alberta Liberal Caucus, once Alberta's Official Opposition, now, it has to be said, a small rump third party. (The first two were Drs. Taft and Swann.) I didn't work with Raj as long as I had with either Kevin or David, but I got to know him well enough to say that his heart was in the right place and he really cared about Albertans, particularly the vulnerable. In a province that vilifies Liberals, Raj took on the challenge of the hardest, most thankless job in Canadian politics, and for that alone I think he deserves thanks.
I shot the photo above on February 1, 2012, a few months before leaving politics behind. It was a pretty nice day for February in Alberta, and Raj was patient and pleasant as I fought with the light; I'm an amateur photographer, not a professional, and I appreciated his forbearance.
Today Raj resigned as Leader of the Alberta Liberals. Whatever he does next, I hope Dr. Sherman finds happiness and fulfillment. He tried to build a better Alberta, and I think that's pretty noble.
Sunday, January 25, 2015
What Memories Real?
A few days ago Jeff commented on the opening montage of the film version of the Buck Rogers in the 25th Century pilot, surmising that not only did Buck spend 500 years dreaming about scantily clad space women, but that the events of the series itself are merely a continuation of that dream. I dismissed the notion out of hand, but then I started to think about the idea more seriously, particularly after watching "The Guardians," a second-season episode in which Buck has a vision of being back on Earth before his ill-fated trip on Ranger 3.
In the vision, Buck awakens at his mother's home back in 1987. He's at the end of a two-week furlough, and Ranger 3 launches the next day. At first he's shocked to find himself back on Earth in his own time, but within a few seconds admits to his mother that his life in the 25th century must have been just a dream. The Ranger 3 mission goes forward...and ends in exactly the same way, with Buck in suspended animation.
During the course of the episode other cast members have visions of their own, and by the end the series' status quo is comfortably reached. And yet now I can't get the notion out of my mind, because the pilot movie explicitly says Buck dreams for centuries, and when he "wakes up," at least two of the women in his dreams - Wilma Deering and Princess Ardala - become, respectively, a leading figure and a recurring figure in the show. This of course suggests the events of the series are merely a continuation of his erotic dreams.
Note, too, the lyrics to "Suspension," the song that plays atop the film's opening credits. Here are a couple of lines:
What thoughts are fantasies, what memories real?
Is it my life or just something I dreamed?
All of a sudden the dream scenario almost seems deliberate. The only drawback to this theory is that the show itself isn't particularly dreamlike, aside from its conventional SF trappings. The storytelling, direction, visual effects and costuming are all pretty straightforward for the genre. Plus it's a pretty unhappy ending for Buck...it implies he never wakes up, and that his new relationships and adventures in the 25th century are just fantasies. In fact, you could even surmise that Buck never enters suspended animation at all, that he's simply flash-frozen and dies in a few seconds. And in dreams, instants can seem to take centuries...all two seasons of the show could simply be the last synaptic jerks in the mind of a dying man.
In the vision, Buck awakens at his mother's home back in 1987. He's at the end of a two-week furlough, and Ranger 3 launches the next day. At first he's shocked to find himself back on Earth in his own time, but within a few seconds admits to his mother that his life in the 25th century must have been just a dream. The Ranger 3 mission goes forward...and ends in exactly the same way, with Buck in suspended animation.
During the course of the episode other cast members have visions of their own, and by the end the series' status quo is comfortably reached. And yet now I can't get the notion out of my mind, because the pilot movie explicitly says Buck dreams for centuries, and when he "wakes up," at least two of the women in his dreams - Wilma Deering and Princess Ardala - become, respectively, a leading figure and a recurring figure in the show. This of course suggests the events of the series are merely a continuation of his erotic dreams.
Note, too, the lyrics to "Suspension," the song that plays atop the film's opening credits. Here are a couple of lines:
What thoughts are fantasies, what memories real?
Is it my life or just something I dreamed?
All of a sudden the dream scenario almost seems deliberate. The only drawback to this theory is that the show itself isn't particularly dreamlike, aside from its conventional SF trappings. The storytelling, direction, visual effects and costuming are all pretty straightforward for the genre. Plus it's a pretty unhappy ending for Buck...it implies he never wakes up, and that his new relationships and adventures in the 25th century are just fantasies. In fact, you could even surmise that Buck never enters suspended animation at all, that he's simply flash-frozen and dies in a few seconds. And in dreams, instants can seem to take centuries...all two seasons of the show could simply be the last synaptic jerks in the mind of a dying man.
Labels:
Buck Rogers,
Jeff S.,
popular culture,
science fiction,
television
Saturday, January 24, 2015
The Day I Lost the Pillow Fight at Lister Hall
Labels:
Alberta,
Edmonton,
Lister Hall,
University of Alberta
Friday, January 23, 2015
Thursday, January 22, 2015
The DVD Savant on Invaders From Mars
Several years ago Glenn Erickson, AKA The DVD Savant, wrote a beautiful analysis of one of my favourite SF films, William Cameron Menzies' surreal Invaders From Mars. Earlier this month Erickson expanded and updated his already excellent essay, and it's worth a read if you're at all interested in film history, science fiction or cult movies.
Part One
Part Two
Part One
Part Two
Labels:
DVD,
Film,
Invaders From Mars,
popular culture,
science fiction
Wednesday, January 21, 2015
Tonight's Episode
70s SF television takes a lot of flak for being cheesy, but Gil Gerard deserves a lot of credit for his subtle but emotionally tortured performance in "A Dream of Jennifer," in which Buck Rogers must confront the loss of the woman he left behind in the 20th century. For all the accolades granted more prestigious fare, there are many more artists whose good work goes unrecognized. Maybe it's 35 years too late, but good job, Gil.
Labels:
Buck Rogers,
popular culture,
science fiction,
television
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
Classic Car-Fuffle
Over the weekend Alberta Premier Jim Prentice found himself a sweet ride at a car auction down in Arizona. In the face of sub-$50 oil and warnings of public service cuts, some progressive folks are arguing that this sends the wrong message to Albertans, that it shows Prentice is just another member of the privileged 1 percent and that his wealth insulates him from the sacrifices he may very shortly ask public sector workers to make.
I don't disagree. As a pretty left wing guy, it seems wrong that some can afford to pay tens of thousands of dollars for fancy toys while others struggle to make ends meet.
But I also understand that I'm as guilty as Prentice, in a sense. After a couple of decades of hard work I'm not poor anymore (I never really was, compared to many), and over the years I, too have spent thousands of dollars on fancy toys - movies, books, Lego, computer games, board games. (On the other hand, I'm not in a position to impoverish others with drastic public spending cuts.)
My point is this: while progressives are free to criticize Prentice for spoiling himself while mulling over actions that could harm tens of thousands, that criticism is more likely to harm the progressive cause than help it. Because deep down, most people want to believe that they, too, might be in a position one day to spoil themselves. Even if you're not a fan of classic cars, nearly everyone has their own share of materialistic desires - the nice house, the rare postage stamp, the around-the-world vacation. Most of us have been programmed to sympathize with Prentice. I know for a fact that I have several family members who would have loved to buy the car Prentice purchased. They're not feeling envy - they're feeling "Good for him. He works hard, he can buy what he wants with his own money."
The amount of money counts, too. Given the exchange rate and taxes and fees, Prentice's purchase will probably only cost him around $75,000 dollars. That's only three times the amount Sylvia and I spent on our last new vehicle. It's a figure that's only just out of reach to a lot of folks in rich (yes, we're still rich) Alberta. Buying a car like this doesn't distance Prentice from ordinary Albertans, because a lot of ordinary Albertans are very well off.
When progressives chide Prentice for spending a few tens of thousands of dollars, we're the ones who seem out of touch. If we ever want to change the government in Alberta, we can't afford to appear petty or jealous. We're better off fighting to protect public institutions and holding the Conservatives accountable for their many years of mismanagement.
I don't disagree. As a pretty left wing guy, it seems wrong that some can afford to pay tens of thousands of dollars for fancy toys while others struggle to make ends meet.
But I also understand that I'm as guilty as Prentice, in a sense. After a couple of decades of hard work I'm not poor anymore (I never really was, compared to many), and over the years I, too have spent thousands of dollars on fancy toys - movies, books, Lego, computer games, board games. (On the other hand, I'm not in a position to impoverish others with drastic public spending cuts.)
My point is this: while progressives are free to criticize Prentice for spoiling himself while mulling over actions that could harm tens of thousands, that criticism is more likely to harm the progressive cause than help it. Because deep down, most people want to believe that they, too, might be in a position one day to spoil themselves. Even if you're not a fan of classic cars, nearly everyone has their own share of materialistic desires - the nice house, the rare postage stamp, the around-the-world vacation. Most of us have been programmed to sympathize with Prentice. I know for a fact that I have several family members who would have loved to buy the car Prentice purchased. They're not feeling envy - they're feeling "Good for him. He works hard, he can buy what he wants with his own money."
The amount of money counts, too. Given the exchange rate and taxes and fees, Prentice's purchase will probably only cost him around $75,000 dollars. That's only three times the amount Sylvia and I spent on our last new vehicle. It's a figure that's only just out of reach to a lot of folks in rich (yes, we're still rich) Alberta. Buying a car like this doesn't distance Prentice from ordinary Albertans, because a lot of ordinary Albertans are very well off.
When progressives chide Prentice for spending a few tens of thousands of dollars, we're the ones who seem out of touch. If we ever want to change the government in Alberta, we can't afford to appear petty or jealous. We're better off fighting to protect public institutions and holding the Conservatives accountable for their many years of mismanagement.
Monday, January 19, 2015
O'Seanigan
New on The EW - Sean Woods stars as O'Seanigan. Justice, like lightning, strikes twice - or wherever it's needed on the grizzled streets of Paradise Cove, or as its residents call it, Slum City. Can O'Seanigan - former cop, former bounty hunter, former cleaner - mete out his own brand of rough justice while avoiding the corrupt authorities of Slum City? Find out on O'Seanigan, Mondays at 7 on The EW.
Labels:
Graphic Design,
Sean,
Silly Nonsense,
television,
The EW
Sunday, January 18, 2015
Saturday, January 17, 2015
Battlestar Galactica in the 25th Century
After watching a few episodes of Buck Rogers in the 25th Century this week, it struck me that the show shared a lot of commonalities with the contemporaneous Battlestar Galactica: creators, behind-the scenes personnel, ship models, sound effects. Buck Rogers outlasted Battlestar by a few months, but Glen A. Larson must have seen that Buck Rogers would soon follow suit. I wonder if he ever considered a fun series finale for Buck and a belated farewell for Battlestar Galactica; he could have had the Galactica finally reach Earth in the last episode of Buck Rogers. How cool would that have been, to see Gil Gerard and Lorne Greene team up to beat the Cylons back from post-holocaust, 25th-century Earth?
Friday, January 16, 2015
Thursday, January 15, 2015
Is it Yet Art?
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
But is it Art?
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
Mom's Starships
Monday, January 12, 2015
Back When the Future Was Innocent
I had a pretty stressful day at work today, so to wind down I decided to lose myself in pop culture. Not quite at random, I picked up my Buck Rogers in the 25th Century DVD set and watched a two-part episode from the show's first season: "The Plot to Kill a City."
It turned out to be a fortuitous choice. While no one would ever mistake Buck Rogers for high art, it was clearly produced with care and affection. These are simple stories of high adventure, entertainment aimed at children and young teens, heaps of fun for the young and the young at heart.
While the costumes, sets and special effects might seem primitive by today's standards, the creators did a remarkable job of building a believable future society within the limits of their time and budget. Yes, the show can be embarrassingly cheesy at moments - but it's also very earnest. I have a weakness for stories in which people of good character work together to solve problems, and this is exactly that sort of show. Despite taking place in a post-apocalyptic future, the series is optimistic, cheerful, and there's not a trace of cynicism to be found. It's the sort of approach that's rarely found in series television today, save, perhaps, New Girl.
So thank you, Glen A. Larson and the writers, actors and technicians who gave us two seasons of science fiction silliness and derring-do. It was definitely what I needed tonight.
It turned out to be a fortuitous choice. While no one would ever mistake Buck Rogers for high art, it was clearly produced with care and affection. These are simple stories of high adventure, entertainment aimed at children and young teens, heaps of fun for the young and the young at heart.
While the costumes, sets and special effects might seem primitive by today's standards, the creators did a remarkable job of building a believable future society within the limits of their time and budget. Yes, the show can be embarrassingly cheesy at moments - but it's also very earnest. I have a weakness for stories in which people of good character work together to solve problems, and this is exactly that sort of show. Despite taking place in a post-apocalyptic future, the series is optimistic, cheerful, and there's not a trace of cynicism to be found. It's the sort of approach that's rarely found in series television today, save, perhaps, New Girl.
So thank you, Glen A. Larson and the writers, actors and technicians who gave us two seasons of science fiction silliness and derring-do. It was definitely what I needed tonight.
Labels:
1970s,
Buck Rogers,
popular culture,
science fiction,
television
Sunday, January 11, 2015
Saturday, January 10, 2015
Saturday Night Turbulence
Labels:
Board Games,
Games,
Jeff P.,
Mike T,
Stephen F.
Friday, January 09, 2015
Thursday, January 08, 2015
Peace, the Final Frontier
Next to Star Trek itself, Star Trek: Deep Space Nine is my favourite of the Trek shows, and indeed one of my favourite television shows ever. But good as it was, I felt it lacked one thing: its principal narrating the show's purpose and vision, or in other words, a variation of Kirk's and Picard's "Space, the final frontier" speech. From the very first episode I wondered what Sisko might have said given the chance to speak over his show's opening credits. 22 years later, here's what he could have said:
"Peace, the final frontier.
These are the stories of Federation starbase Deep Space Nine.
Its ongoing mission: to explore strange new worlds and their people,
to discover common cause and restore a civilization...
to boldly stand our ground like none before."
Well, something along those lines, anyway.
"Peace, the final frontier.
These are the stories of Federation starbase Deep Space Nine.
Its ongoing mission: to explore strange new worlds and their people,
to discover common cause and restore a civilization...
to boldly stand our ground like none before."
Well, something along those lines, anyway.
Wednesday, January 07, 2015
Cannonball Run III
Down the middle, a steam locomotive pulling a passenger train. On the right, a Corvette Stingray driven alternately by a male and a female actor of the 70s in their prime. On the left, a T-800 paddling a kayak. Overhead, a gorilla piloting an ultralight.
The stakes: a cheap plastic trophy. Expect interference from cyborg cowboy bandits, the Sasquatch and law enforcement.
The stakes: a cheap plastic trophy. Expect interference from cyborg cowboy bandits, the Sasquatch and law enforcement.
Labels:
Extreme Sports,
science fiction,
Silly Nonsense
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)









